Showing posts with label Alex Sanders. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alex Sanders. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

Spiritual Ancestors as Heroes



Recently I’ve had a very unpleasant experience arguing with an occult pundit (Nick Farrell) who basically called me a naïve fool because I honor my spiritual ancestors and treat them as heroes. Because I celebrate and honor my spiritual ancestors and treat them with a certain amount of reverence I am considered a dupe and a fool. The reason for this criticism, of course, is because I happen to revere such individuals as Alex Sanders, Gerald Gardner, Aleister Crowley, MacGregor Mathers, or any other number of occult founders and trail Blazers. I take an uncritical and positive outlook on these individuals because they have had such an impact upon my own workings and study. Maybe that’s being naïve and stupid, since in our current time it’s so trendy to be cynical, negative and disparaging of the occult luminaries of the past. I have been called a pathetic hero worshiper and that makes me the worst possible judge of anyone’s character, especially those who have been dead nigh these many years. Yes, I admit it, I’m rightfully found guilty of hero worshiping, but I think that I have an important reason for taking this stand.

It’s not as if I haven’t read about these individuals and know all too well that they were human beings with human failings and flaws. I have also talked to individuals who personally knew Alex Sanders and the consensus is that he was quite a disreputable character. There seems to be no lack of stories about things that Alex did that were notorious and completely over-the-top. It seems that everybody has an opinion about Alex who knew him, and most of those opinions tend towards the negative. There are some people still living today who absolutely despise Alex and have few or even no fond memories of him whatsoever. Someone once told me that Alex was the kind of man who hated to work and so chose a life that was materially precarious when all he had to do was keep a regular job, and that would have made his life and the lives of those he supported more stable.

So, Alex Sanders was something of a gold brick. He was also reputed to be a great storyteller (another way of saying "liar") and had to be the focus of attention at all times. He invited the press and even the police to his very public gatherings in order to garner as much publicity as possible. That’s hardly the kind of stellar image that one would consider either heroic or worthy of emulation. Even so, Alex was a trailblazer and started his own tradition. He was an avid experimenter and tried to mix all sorts of different occult disciplines together into a workable whole. His tradition invited many different and divergent people together under one large tradition. Many of the first gay and lesbian witches that I met years ago were Alexandrian, and this was also true of the first African American and handicapped members. Alexandrian Witchcraft was the “big tent” tradition, and this was before other traditions appeared that catered to specific social collectives, such as the Dianic tradition. Perhaps we can turn a blind eye to his various flaws and bad behavior if we focus instead on what he contributed to the pagan and witchcraft movements. The world needed Alex Sanders, warts, obnoxious behavior and all.

What then is a hero? How do we define what a hero is in our culture today? Is Superman or Mighty Mouse good examples of the iconic hero? What about the antiheroes that are found in Marvel comics? Are they to be considered heroes as well? I found myself pondering the definition of a hero, but then I remembered that a good place to find that definition clearly established would be reading what the author Joseph Campbell had to say about it. Joseph Campbell says, “A hero is someone who has given his or her life to something bigger than one’s self.” Well, that seems simple enough, but does that fit the heroism of being a spiritual founder? Additionally, Joseph Campbell says that a hero brings back a “boon” to his community. Basically, Mr. Campbell is referring to the hero’s journey, and the object of that journey is to return something back from the underworld into the world of light. The hero also manifests a steadfast virtue in what they have contributed to their community, despite all of their flaws. According to Campbell, heroes are indeed flawed because they are so human. They are, in word, us. A cartoon hero on the other hand often lacks the kind of humanity necessary as the foundation of being a hero. Despite being flawed, the hero becomes a role model that inspires the rest of us to be better than we thought we could be. A hero is also inspired by an “inner calling.”

I believe that if we take what Joseph Campbell has defined regarding a hero, we can easily apply that definition to individuals such as Alex Sanders, Crowley, and Mathers - not to mention Gardner and many others. As heroes we would expect them to be terribly flawed on the one hand, but also inspiring and the bringer of a profound new way of thinking or practicing occultism on the other. All of these founders had that in common with each other, and all of them were egregiously flawed. To accept their gifts while repudiating their characters or disparaging them could be construed as being highly ungenerous, if not cynically and selfishly motivated. We all owe these founders a certain amount of respect and consideration because we have accepted their gifts and use them in our work; since to behave otherwise is to show oneself as greedy, power-hungry and soulless. I am not advocating that we turn a blind eye to the flaws and imperfections that were so highly on display by these founders, but instead we should really focus on the gifts that they bestowed us. All I am saying is that you can appreciate the history without having to assassinate the character of those trailblazers who came before us. After all is said and done, their gifts were certainly important to us occultists.

Because I’m an Alexandrian witch, then Alex Sanders is one of my spiritual ancestors. Since I also work the Golden Dawn system of magick, at least in part, then MacGregor Mathers would be considered one of my spiritual ancestors. I have to also include Alister Crowley as one of my spiritual ancestors because I have benefitted greatly from reading his work and I was also a member of the O.T.O. Gerald Gardner would be yet another spiritual ancestor in my witchcraft and magical lineage. There are probably many others as well, but that’s the group of ancestors that I’m willing to talk about. So, these four individuals who are founders of their respective traditions make up part of the overall lineage that I have followed as both a witch and a ritual magician. As representatives of the various streams that make up the current of spirituality and magick that I follow, I believe it is important to venerate the memory of these individuals because as magical heroes they have given the world great gifts, and I happen to use those gifts.

We, as ritual magicians, do not stand alone or in isolation. Our practices, whether or not we have been inventive and creative, have come down to us from the work of many other hands across the centuries. This is the whole basis to the perennial philosophy, and while we may add a greater or lesser share to this knowledge, we have received what our spiritual ancestors have passed on to us. Therefore, lineages are important and represent the combined streams that seamlessly joined together to formulate the work and practice of each initiated ritual magician. Our lineages are not exclusive to those founders whose tradition we were initiated into, since each and everyone of us has borrowed extensively from other sources. We are, in a word, a melange or mixture of many different traditions and strains.

To give respect and veneration to the founders of our tradition and practices, we receive from them empowerment, since this opens and establishes the connection between us and them. While this might function as an egregore of a tradition, it is not limited to that vehicle, but could represent the single contribution of some brilliant luminary in the past. Therefore, to use the gifts of our spiritual and magical founders is to be empowered by them. And if we are to retain a certain amount of grace and positive intent in our practices it is important for us to not only acknowledge them, but also to venerate them. This means not just respecting them and their gifts, but also giving them offerings and periodic acknowledgment. This is a Pagan thing to do, to honor our ancestors, both those that are genetic as well as those who represent the lineage of traditions and ideas that we follow. We act this way to retain a certain amount of honor for ourselves and for our work. Just as we give offerings to our genetic ancestors in order to function as modern pagans, we should also give offerings to our spiritual ancestors as well. We do this despite their history and notoriety as flawed human beings who had many failings and even engaged in disreputable activities. This is not white washing or wishful thinking, or even a terrible naïveté; it is a pagan way of honoring those who came before us. It is also how we honor the gifts that they courageously sought and achieved for our benefit.

Now, when we consider everything that I have written up to this point, you can see the ideas that I am promoting and even celebrating as a witch, ritual magician, initiate and adept. I believe that being faithful to the founder and the trailblazer of one’s spiritual lineage is an important part of being an adept. It is not naïve nor foolish to venerate one’s spiritual ancestors, just as it isn’t foolish or naïve to venerate one’s genetic ancestors. It is part of being a pagan and a magician, and so in this context to behave and comport oneself in this manner is honorable and generous. After all, wouldn’t I want people to behave in a respectful fashion to me after I have gone to great lengths to give them the lore that I have labored upon for so many years? Do I want people to disparage me for my all too human failings and personal flaws while at the same time greedily using my ideas and writings for their personal betterment? I believe that that is the real issue regarding the honoring and veneration of spiritual ancestors. How would you like to be treated disparagingly by posterity in the future when you are unable to defend yourself, and even worse, when those same people are still using your ideas and rituals?

While it is so trendy and cool to be cynical, disparaging and cleverly negative to anyone who is a founder or trailblazer, or even someone who could be considered a magical hero, I think that it is despicable and deplorable behavior which only serves to define someone who is actually bankrupt of any original ideas and morally a scoundrel. This might sound like harsh criticism, but I see it as a powerful antidote to the popular sentiment of iconoclastic thinking that seems to be the trend in postmodern occultism today. I stand against that kind of thinking, which I suppose makes me something of counter force in popular thought. Then again, I think that I have good reason for acting and believing as I do because I have found that the popular consensus contradicts both good Pagan theology as well as good magical practice.

Frater Barrabbas

Saturday, March 9, 2013

Early Days in BTW Witchcraft - Innovation or Conservation?


Recently, I wrote a blog article that examined whether or not I am relevant, and I looked at how things had changed over the decades, and that in my opinion, traditional witchcraft within the Gardnerian lineages had changed from being innovative to ultra conservative. Someone who goes by the moniker of “MP” somewhat disagreed with what I said, and also pointed out that innovation for the sake of innovation is no more commendable than mindless preservation and rote mimicry.

I would have to agree with some of what MP said, but since I was a witch in the early 1970's, and I was also aware of what was going on in the very late 1960's, I recall a different kind of activity than what MP said regarding the BTW propensity for conservation. As an Alexandrian, I represent a very different kind of witch from the rank and file Gardnerians, especially the American branch, which has it own peculiarities. Here is the article and MP’s comment.

MP wrote in the comments section:

Also, the emphasis has changed from experimentation to the conservative preservation of the core practices and beliefs.

“A number of BTW people I know, who date back to the 70s, as you do, I believe, would disagree that this is a change ... their point is that they have always been focused on orthopraxy, and retention of core practices, and ALSO noting where additions have been made to their praxis, and where it diverges from core.”

When lineages, pedigrees, lineage vouches and staunch, mindless preservation of the lore become far more important than modification, revision and experimentation, then I think that religious conservatism has become the preeminent force in that tradition.

“Again, they would tell you that preservation of the lore, though not mindless preservation, knowing who taught you, and who you taught, are not changes - that they were always there, and that, yes, they are conservative - in that they are conserving, like conservationists, their craft so that it might continue on.

Innovation for the sake of innovation is no more commendable than mindless preservation and rote mimicry.”

Perhaps one of the greatest examples of what was going on during the late sixties in the Witchcraft arena can be summed up by watching a video that has recently been made available. It is called “Legend of the Witches” and I wrote up an article some months ago that examined that film in detail - you can find it here. Needless to say, what the film shows is that Alexander Sanders and his coven at that time were very experimental in their approach to discovering what witchcraft was.

They were not alone, since quite a number of witches were doing the same thing. The reason is very simple, the amount of actual preserved lore in Witchcraft was quite small and for the most part, inadequate for any kind of in-depth practice. The Book of Shadows was not much more than an outline of many of the liturgical rituals (basic coven rites, the Esbat, initiations and the eight Sabbats), but it lacked any kind of theology or specifically, magical rites. Not every tradition used or followed the witches’ law, also known as the “Ardanes,” so there wasn’t really much depth to the basic Book of Shadows.

Typically, a practicing witch had to research and re-write many of the rituals, including writing in the specific coven-based or tradition-based variations. An initiated witch had her Book of Shadows and some lineage specific lore, but the rest of her practice was culled from many different sources. Becoming a witch wasn’t the end but literally the beginning of a master research effort, and that also consisted of a lot of experimentation. If the witchcraft tradition had been a complete and comprehensive system of religion and magic, then very few individuals would have had any need to incorporate other sources. In fact, it was quite incomplete, and in my opinion, it still is. This is one of the reasons why some witches have referred to themselves as being the “people of the library” instead of the “people of the book,” like their Christian and Jewish counterparts.  

I can remember that one thing that characterized my coven experience is that we had to research and build up our own Sabbat rites from the skeleton structures found in the Book of Shadows. We discovered a rich source of lore in British and European Folk traditions, and in many cases, had to write our own Sabbat songs, food recipes, and even music and dances - all of this was missing from the Book of Shadows. We also discovered that the full moons were characterized by the seasons as well as by astrology, and this moon lore was collected and became the foundation for the Esbat. In the BoSh there is no distinction of the different seasonal full moons, there’s just the outline for an Esbat rite, including the various Charges of the Goddess, some of which had been added by Doreen Valiente but seldom credited to her.

When it came down to magical workings, there was also very little in the way of techniques and recipes. Many Gardnerians and Alexandrians embraced the book Aradia, Gospel of the Witches and the Mabinogian, not to mention many other sources, like the Key of Solomon, as representations of additional lore. To master the techniques of meditation and contemplation, we used Eastern techniques, since there wasn’t any traditional techniques elucidated in the Book of Shadows, other than dancing the circle dance. In fact, there wasn’t any directions for assuming a basic trance, but there was a rite used to gain altered states through binding and scourging - although few were a fan of that working.

I could easily point out many other important elements that were missing from either the BoSh or the lineage based lore. During the sixties and seventies, we few members of the BTW were inventing the various traditions that are now being assiduously conserved. I should state that I know all of this first hand and that it is true, because I was there during that time. I lived through it, so I should know what things were like back then.

In the many years that I have been a witch who also practices high magick, I have extended my knowledge and lore of liturgical withcraft to include many different and diverse rituals and practices that were never a part of my original teachings. In fact, I have used the foundation of witchcraft to build what I consider to be a hybrid system of high magick, which is completely harmonious to witchcraft practices and beliefs. I could never have gotten this far with my work if I had been more interested in preserving and perfecting merely what I had been given by my elders. This is especially true since my elders had invented quite a lot of their lore as well, and while I dutifully noted all of this down, I also ceaselessly engaged in researching, building and developing my own new lore. This process continues unabated to this day, and I can say that I am within a decade or so of building a comprehensive system of witchcraft-based high magick. I also believe that this was one of Gardner’s objectives, and he seems to allude to it in his fictional work “High Magic’s Aid.” In that book, ceremonial magic is mixed with pagan witchcraft to produce a methodology that is greater than both traditions. I took that as my guide, and I have proceeded on that pathway ever since.

So, to respond to MP’s statement that conservation was happening at the very beginning of the craft, I believe that this is quite misleading. While it is true that we had to copy our BoSh exactly as the master copy owned by the High Priestess and Priest and we had to learn the basic liturgical lore in order to be elevated to the priesthood ourselves, we understood that we also had begun a spiritual and magical journey that was unprecedented - what we received and learned was just the beginning. We all felt that we were under a powerful obligation to expand our knowledge and add many more pages to our BoSh and lineage lore. Our purpose was to rediscover antique witchcraft and paganism in our own practices, and I believe that process is still mutating and evolving today. For those who believe that their lore is perfected and complete and that the only task that they should and must engage in is to preserve their lore in it’s purest expression, I can only shake my head at their obvious hubris and narrow-mindedness.

Modern Witchcraft is a very young and new religion, and as Ronald Hutton has stated in regards to British Witchcraft, there isn’t likely to be any vestiges of the Old Religion to be found in the historical records. What we have today was cobbled together from various sources a mere sixty years ago. Therefore, we must invent, create, and experiment in order to forge a full and complete tradition. Until that day comes, preservation is nothing more than an historical exercise. It has its value, but the work of creating a fuller and more complete tradition is much more important in my opinion. If the work is halted for any reason or any excuse, then the tradition will begin to die and that death will happen all the more rapidly since Wicca is still in the process of growing and becoming a mature religious tradition.

Now if that seems to be invention and innovation for the mere sake of doing something new and different, then so be it! It is what was done in the sixties and seventies, and there is now more than enough reason to continue this process of development. It is also the unwritten rule that I have followed all of these years, much to my profit and self-mastery.

Frater Barrabbas

Saturday, July 28, 2012

Advanced Alexandrian Witchcraft - A Wiccan Golden Dawn


I have recently wrote an article stating my opinion that Alex Sanders was a modern day Pagan Magus. I demonstrated, by carefully examining an old documentary, that he was clearly engaged in an experimental approach to witchcraft and magick. He was employing both modern and traditional elements in the crafting his variation of Wicca, but the traditional elements were not part of an ancient pagan tradition. That tradition was taken from a Gardnerian Book of Shadows, but also included the Key of Solomon and the Lemegeton, and it has been shown that most of the Book of Shadows was derived from other various sources (almost all of them modern and accessible to Gerald B. Gardner).

In many ways, Alex was following the footsteps of Old Gerald himself, by incorporating the whole corpus of western occultism into forging a new tradition. What many may not realize is that Alex Sanders did have a goal and a vision for his work, and that he was deliberately attempting to forge a new tradition of pagan religion and magick. He was only partially successful, since he lacked the ability to write and communicate his ideas to a larger audience. Still, as an initiate of the Alexandrian tradition of witchcraft, I was made aware of certain rumors and ideas that had supposedly filtered down from Alex himself, although I have never been able to verify or prove that to be true.

I would like to use this forum to discuss some of those things that I heard, and I believe that I can do this without breaking any of my initiatic oaths, since what was communicated to me was not part of the actual corpus of traditional rites or specific identifying myths and Godnames. I feel that I can discuss something that I had found momentous, even if it didn’t really amount to much more than innuendo and speculation. Still. I found all of that speculation to be quite fascinating and inspiring.

Alexandrians are actually Gardnerians with an additional emphasis on ritual and ceremonial magick, which I believe is what Gardner would have called “High Magic.” Most of the Book of Shadows, its liturgies and other materials, are nearly identical for both Gardnerians and Alexandrians. Some poetic versions of specific liturgical rites are missing, and so is the “Ardanes”, or the Laws of Witchcraft. Both traditions practice their rites skyclad, perform the Great Rite and the Draw, and celebrate a communion rite of cakes and wine. Aradia, the Gospel of the Witches is considered one of a few important sacred books, and the outer court Godhead names of Diana and Aradia are considered important.

It would also appear, if one were to really examine the works of Gerald B. Gardner, that the proclivity for high magic was actually established first by him, even though many Gardnerians in the present time don’t consider it to be important. In many ways the curious tradition of witchcraft as set down by Gardner seems to be more a variant of Italian Stregharia than a proper form of British Witchcraft. Sacral nudity and an emphasis on the Great Rite would seem to be particular to Gardnerian and Alexandrian witchcraft, but they don’t seem to be as important to other British based traditions of Witchcraft which don’t follow Gardner’s foundational praxis. I have often wondered about this stark difference, and I suspect that there might be more to the coincidental similarities between Strega and Gardnerian Witchcraft than one might think.

Even so, where Alexandrian and Gardnerian traditions depart from each other is the obvious incorporation of the Golden Dawn corpus of the Adeptus Minor. It would seem that some of the Alexandrians were required to learn and master the Golden Dawn magical rituals, although this is no longer emphasized. I know that this was required of me in order to receive my second degree initiation, and it may have an important part of the tradition back in the 1970's. I had to take and either perfectly memorize or rewrite variations of the six most basic rituals taught in the four elemental degrees of the Golden Dawn, and particularly, the rituals taught in the beginning Adept grade. I have discussed these six rituals previously, but let me list them here again so that my readers will fully understand what I am talking about.

1. Lesser Banishing and Invoking Ritual of the Pentagram
2. Qabalistic Cross
3. Middle Pillar
4. Superior Pentagram Ritual
5. Lesser and Superior Hexagram Ritual
6. Rose Cross Ritual

What we were taught is how these rituals were to be deployed, but they were often practiced as a distinct corpus from the battery of rituals found in the Book of Shadows. In other words, in order to employ the above rituals in the work of elemental and planetary magic, an Alexandrian witch would have to either omit the basic circle consecration rite, or employ a variation of the Opening and Closing of the Watchtower ritual. It would seem in retrospect that the Golden Dawn ritual of the Watchtower was used by Gerald Gardner to formulate the circle consecration rite, although that rite, as found in the Book of Shadows, is a poor facsimile of the more rigorous and in-depth Golden Dawn Watchtower ritual.

In the recent past, I have had a few experts in the Golden Dawn tradition note the imperfections and erroneous assumptions to be found in the Wiccan circle consecration rite. Despite these imperfections, the ritual appears to work as it was originally conceived. Instead of being used to fashion a domain of warding and protection, it seems to operate as a way of establishing a circle boundary between the sacred inner world of the Gods and the profane outer world of humanity. This is quite a different purpose than what is promoted in the Golden Dawn Watchtower rite, and for some odd reason it seems more in accordance with the ancient pagan practices of establishing and keeping a marked boundary between the sacred ground of the temple precincts and the rest of country.

As I have also stated previously, because of the way that the Wiccan circle consecration rite was written (as opposed to the Golden Dawn Watchtower rite), the focus of the magick performed within the charged circle produced by that rite is one of immersion. Unlike the pristine environment of the Golden Dawn Watchtower rite, the Wiccan circle consecration rite has no boundaries or protections against anything that is invoked or evoked within that magick circle complex. The only thing protecting the erstwhile Witch is the obligatory godhead assumption that he or she performs before engaging in the practical work as a part of the individual repertoire of pagan ritual magick.

Because the foundation of Witchcraft magick is so different than what is practiced in western ceremonial magick, I was forced into radically rewriting the above Golden Dawn rituals so that they formed a completely seamless and related system of magick. I have known other practitioners who have either adjusted or differentiated their Wiccan magical foundation in order to practice Golden Dawn magick. Yet for whatever reason, I didn’t ever go through that process, so I never really mastered the Golden Dawn system of magick as it is presented in books and practiced in various Golden Dawn groups. For this reason, I went in a completely different direction, and chose to mutate the basic Golden Dawn rites into a formulation that was amendable to a corpus of Witchcraft magick.

However, the most important device that I incorporated into my newly devised system of magick was the Rose Ankh. If the Rose Cross is the preeminent symbol of the Golden Dawn, then the Rose Ankh would be its polarized opposite. Since I was in the habit of working with polarities as the essential foundation of my magick, then each ritual structure and device would have its equal opposite. Thus, to the Cone of Power (reconfigured into the Pyramid of Power) would be the Spiral Vortex; the Western Gateway of the Underworld would be polarized by the Eastern Gateway of Ascension; the Pentagram would have as its opposite, the Septagram; and the Rose Cross would have the Rose Ankh as its opposite. In each of these situations, a device or a ritual structure could use an obverse and inverted version of itself, such as an inverted pentagram or an inverted Rose Ankh (defined as a special symbol analogous to the regal orb surmounted by a cross). All of these opposites and inversions represent a magical toolkit that uses polarity as its greatest expression of power, and of course, ecstasy is the achievement when polarities are joined together (in emulation of the One).

My first exposure to the Rose Ankh was while I was going through the grades of Alexandrian witchcraft. What I was told by my teachers (and thereby taken with a grain of salt) was that Alex Sanders had as his ultimate goal to produce a system of magick that was analogous to the Golden Dawn. In fact it would have been a Wiccan Golden Dawn whose emphasis would have been on the feminine archetype and the Great Goddess. I was even given a copy of a special Rose Ankh device, which was a close analogue to the Golden Dawn Rose Cross device, when I achieved the third degree. While I am unable to share any of the specifics of that Rose Ankh device, the creative impetus for this new formulation obviously went along with Alex Sander’s vision of a re-established Pagan and Wiccan Golden Dawn. Of course, I found that by drawing the device of the Rose Ankh in the air, it produced a powerful magnetic energy, which is the opposite of what the drawn Rose Cross would produce. Adding the ritual structure of the spiral vortex to the placement of five Rose Ankh devices produces what I have called an invoking vortex, which is a powerful magnetic energy container that can strongly attract and hold spirits within it.

Another interesting bit of speculation has to do with that mysterious initiation rite in Alexandrian Witchcraft known as the Fourth Degree. While most of the Gardnerian based traditions of Witchcraft have only three degrees (the first two were loosely modeled on the Masonic initiations for Entered Apprentice and Fellow Craft, and the third was more an honorific), the Alexandrians promoted the possibility of a fourth degree. There is plenty of speculation about the nature of this initiation, and I have even found where a few individuals on the internet have said that the Garnderian tradition used the 4th degree initiation of the O.T.O. for expanding its degree system, and the Alexandrians used the Adeptus Minor initiation of the Golden Dawn. I have found no precedence for this speculation in any of my own personal Alexandrian lore, but I can at least say that there is a skeleton rite for this initiation in the Alexandrian Book of Shadows, which might also be found in some versions of the Gardnerian Book of Shadows. That skeleton rite has only a basic structure and the mysteries that might have been presented within it are completely omitted, as if to say that they were too sacred to even put in a secret book of spells and liturgy.

Since the Gardnerian system of initiation has only two ordeals and the Great Rite is an honorific, then it would seem that the systems of initiation as found in Masonry, the Golden Dawn and the O.T.O., which have at least three ordeals, are neither contiguous nor comparable to the initiation of Traditional Witchcraft. Yet the outdoor initiation ordeal of the Four Elements which seems to be a specialized trope used by Alex Sanders and his group might be a clue to an ordeal that incorporated the four elemental degrees into the tradition of Witchcraft. This might have been used to prepare an initiate (and not a novice) for the vaunted higher degrees believed to be practiced or conceptualized in the Alexandrian tradition of Witchcraft. As you can see, there are some compelling clues that point to a ceremonial magickal initiatory system in the Alexandrian tradition, but there appears to be little in the way of any hard evidence or actual rites being passed down the various lines (as far as I know).       

In many ways these clues represent a potential system and methodology, but in the end, the Alexandrian tradition over time dropped the emphasis on high magick and became fairly analogous to the Gardnerian tradition. There was even a certain amount of sharing and reconstituting of the traditional lore between both traditions, and many of the new holders of the Alexandrian traditional lines of initiation began to act as conservative preservers of their tradition, and that means that they had become inimical to any kind of change in their lore, supposedly just like their Gardnerian sisters and brothers.

During the last decade there has been a powerful movement of establishing the legitimacy of the various initiatory lineages, and that each and every third degree initiate had to have a proper vouch of some kind in order to be considered a legitimate witch. This obsession with legitimacy is actually quite new to the Alexandrian tradition, and in fact it has completely replaced the fascination and zeal that the tradition once had for experimentation and the discovering of new occult frontiers. I have found this change to be quite disappointing, since unlike some of my fellow practitioners who survived into the 21st century, I took the hints of a merged system of Witchcraft and Pagan Ritual Magick quite seriously. In fact, where Alex Sanders appears to have never realized his ideal of a Wiccan Golden Dawn, and he went on to explore other areas altogether different, I continued to pursue this ideal and I have realized it in the system and methodology of ritual magick that I employ today.

Although what I have developed and produced is decidedly unlike the Golden Dawn in its various rituals, practices and beliefs, I have instead produced a specific system and tradition of magick that has taken many of these rites and practices and brought them into the context of the foundation of traditional Witchcraft. In the rites and ordeals of the Order of the Gnostic Star, you will find that the basic system of Witchcraft magic has been vastly extended and advanced into a system of high magick that has a seamless continuity from the most basic system of Witchcraft and Pagan magick. So it would seem that where Alex Sander’s dream was never realized by himself, in fact it was realized in the system of magick that I have given birth to over the many decades since. I could, therefore, claim to have developed and established a Wiccan Golden Dawn, but I think that I will instead call it by what it has actually become, which is a system of Wiccan and Pagan ritual magick as opposed to ceremonial magick.

Frater Barrabbas

Saturday, July 7, 2012

Alex Sanders - A Pagan Magus


Recently, I ordered a copy of what had once been a rare British film that had been produced and released in 1969. That film was a documentary with the curious title of “Legend of the Witches,” which was produced by an obscure British film company (Border Films Ltd.) and written and directed by Malcolm Leigh. The modern witches depicted in this hour and a half black and white documentary were from the primary coven run by Alex and Maxine Sanders. While it’s not unusual today to find video of witches on U-Tube, at that time it would have been quite astonishing for a practicing witch coven to allow a film crew to document actual witchcraft practices. However, considering the fact that Alex Sanders already had a notorious reputation as something of a gratuitous public promoter of witchcraft, such a revealing film is somewhat less amazing than it might seem. In fact, you could say that Alex Sanders was one of the original “Glam Witches” of the 1960's.

While there were a few other witches who had become publically known at that time (such as Sibyl Leek, Lady Sheba or Louise Hubner), an actual filming of witches practicing their craft would have been completely unthinkable. Witches were sworn to secrecy, and their rites, along with their Book of Shadows, were held as an inviolable oath-bound lore known only to initiates. Yet here was Alex Sanders allowing a crew of outsiders to film his workings! It should not be too surprising that Alex was disparaged from the beginning when he started to open up to the British press and perform public ceremonies. Alex seemed to love the notoriety that such actions gained for him, and that included the bad press as well as the vilification he received from the largely British Gardnerian Witchcraft community. He was perceived by other witches as a public exhibitionist, thief and possible oath-breaker, and they quickly decided to dispute his right to be considered a legitimate member of their community. It’s likely that Patricia Crowther and some other British Gardnerian witches began their program against Alex after he had gone too far with his public religious immodesty. Unlike today, in the late 60's there were very few traditions and covens for individuals to engage with, and in the U.S., there were only a few Gardnerian covens overall, and these were located on the East Coast. (Of course, there was also the Feri tradition fully formed by that time on the West coast.)

The tenor of this documentary reminded me of some excruciatingly boring and pedantic elementary school film about nature, the kind that nearly everyone has been subjected to at some point. The exception was that this film had plenty of strange oddities, weird music, psychedelic effects and nude bodies to make it quite provocative and alluring. The subject matter and the title were both highly sensational at the time, so it would have been a notorious film had it been widely released. Now it’s a relic of a very important period in the evolution of practical witchcraft, where the specific Alexandrian form of the Craft was being developed in what appears to be a highly creative and fluid environment.

When witchcraft was being pursued and promoted back in the 1950's and 60's, there was little actual historically verified lore. Most of what was practiced as witchcraft was derived from other sources (and this practice has continued into the present times). For Alex Sanders and his coven, this meant assembling a wide spectrum of various traditional practices and mixing them with very modern affectations to produce a purely experimental methodology. In other words, he was attempting to see what worked and what didn’t work, developing the former and discarding the latter. In this way, Alex Sanders and his coven were engaging in a task that is analogous to what I have presented here in this blog. As the leader of this group, one could correctly claim that Alex Sanders was functioning as a Pagan Magus, and his experiments and discoveries became the basis of a whole new tradition of witchcraft.

It would seem that Alex wasn’t interested in just modestly performing the various sparse rituals as would have been found in the Gardnerian Book of Shadows, but instead he sought to fill out and spice up his tradition with whatever stimulated his very creative imagination. This film truly captures Alex and his coven in the middle of that creative process and it is fascinating to observe this phenomenon as it was happening, although captured on film. Alex didn’t just throw together a bunch of outlier ceremonies to titillate the gratuitous public hunger for occult voyeurism. He actually and sincerely presented himself and his coven engaged in their religious and magical work as a true representation of what they believed and did in those days. What we have in this film is a valuable time capsule, a kind of snapshot of modern witchcraft in the process of evolving and mutating into the many traditions and variations that exist today. Others would later go through this very process of developing and determining their spiritual lore and personal praxis, and from that would occur the many lineages of the Witchcraft movement. (I, myself, have and continue to go through this very same process.)

The movie starts out discussing the myth of Diana, the Moon Goddess, and Lucifer, the Sun God, who became the dual-theological pair known by various names today. It is a rendition of the creation myth that passes as common (and even public) lore today, but then it was obscure and little known. This creation myth was given an excellent backdrop in the film, consisting of a natural setting somewhere in the coastal area of England, with the full moon illuminating a lovely forest setting. The movie promotes the idea that witchcraft is a natural religion founded on the belief that nature itself is the source of all that is sacred, which is life itself. While the movie talks about the Goddess and God pair named as Diana and Lucifer, the actual names that I received through my Alexandrian initiation were quite different, and perhaps here is where the public was given outer-court names instead of the actual names used within the covenstead. The use of the name Lucifer is understandable and perhaps it even has some traditional weight, but it has become something of a embarrassment for witches today, so it is seldom used now.

Here we see the coven consecrating a circle in an outdoor grove with a central fire. All are nude except the High Priestess and High Priest. While Maxine was wearing a filmy bit of wrap-around sarong that left little to the imagination, Alex was wearing a full robe and cincture, looking something like a hooded monk. Alex often said that he wore a robe to distinguish himself as the coven’s priest, and if it weren’t for the fact that there are some pictures of him skyclad (like everyone else), one might think that he was squeamish about being nude in front of others. The purpose for this gathering is quickly explained, for it is an initiation circle. 

A young man, whose name is given as Michael, is led and coaxed blindfolded through a difficult terrain to demonstrate his worthiness to become a witch. He has to pass bravely through the four elements depicted as a series of ordeals. The first is water, where he crosses a stream and then has his head briefly dunked into the flowing water by his guide. He has to pass difficult terrain and to literally at times, feel his way through the obstacles. He has to jump down from a short outcropping of rock and trust that he will land safely (air), he passes through a cave and overcomes his fear of being lost or entombed (earth), and finally, he crosses what seems like a wall of flame (torches) to safely enter the coven circle, only to be subjected to the point of a ceremonial sword. With a kiss, he is brought into the circle, bound by cords and then presented to the four directions. He is charged and consecrated, then the blindfold is removed and he is presented the craft tools. As the light of dawn begins to wax, the witches (with their bare feet) smother the fire with dirt and obliterate any signs of their work.

Then the film presents the history of witchcraft, which is based on what craft leaders believed at that time. As yet, there was no Ronald Hutton or Philip Heselton, so the history of the craft took on a rather mythic and overly glorified revisionism. The history of magical practices and beliefs may have had a direct line extending from pagan antiquity to the present, but as far as any evidence of a religious movement, little has been found to support this belief, at least in the UK. Still, what was presented as a history of witchcraft was based more on the lurid fear and prosecution of diabolism, particularly as it occurred during the years of the reformation.

Witchcraft PR, beginning with Gardner himself, had pretty much accepted the theories and explanations put forth by Margarete Murray, but these have been more or less rejected by present-day historians. Even so, it is likely that some of Murray’s theories may turn out to be correct in regards to the cunning folk and their origins. The basic tropes of the burning times, the overlaying of Christian beliefs and practices upon a pagan foundation, and the association of a religious witchcraft with Robin Hood and maid Marian, William the Conqueror, Joan of Arc, and the origins of the Knights of the Garter are the basic staples of this history. This presentation is unfortunately now more fancy than fact, but still, other future developments might shift things in a somewhat different direction.


Another interesting vignette in the film is where Alex and his coven form, charge and give life to a fithfath, or poppet. The movie segues from the terrible burning times to the supposed fact that witches had the knowledge and power to strike back at their persecutors. Here we see the modern coven performing the various steps of creating a fithfath out of bees wax for the purported use of projecting a death spell. Whatever the real reason for creating the fithfath, it is obviously being used to harm someone instead of heal, which would have been untypical of a later Alexandrian coven. This gathering is indoors, conducted within a built up temple complex used for both ceremonial and witchcraft magick. There is a witchcraft circle (drawn from ceremonial themes) as well as a goetic triangle, and each are used for some aspect of the working. Each step of the process of creating this fithfath is carefully depicted, almost as if it were to be used in a scholastic test later on.

The fithfath is hollowed out with a long nail from the head down through spine and then on to the two legs. Then bits of metals, herbs and semen are inserted into the aperture, and finally it is sealed up. What follows is the performance of a sympathetic birthing process, where the High Priestess lies within the circle in a pose that is known as the pentagram form. She holds in her teeth a charged cord, which is placed down her body and wrapped around the fithfath that is set between her legs, like an umbilical cord. The High Priest wraps the other end of the cord around his waist, and he then lays upon the High Priestess in a simulacrum of the Great Rite. Once the combined powers of these two celebrants is fully realized within the fithfath, it is believed to have been given life, much as the first human pair were given birth by the Goddess and the God. Once this is done, the fithfath is ritually drowned by the person who is acting as the link for the actual victim, thereby setting up the potential for an actual drowning of the victim. The killing of the fithfath is done in a special basin held over the goetic triangle, as if to somehow utilize its demonic association.

A startling scene change then presents to the viewer, in graphic detail, all of the strange and lurid contents of the Boscastle, Cornwall, Museum of Witchcraft, owned and operated by Cecil Williams (now deceased). What is focused on in this film vignette are a series of gruesome images of the tools and fetishes that were obviously used to inflict pain, sickness and death on various unknown victims. This trope is pursued relentlessly, including the repeated word “hate” as each article in the black magic collection is perused. I don’t know why this theme was pushed, except perhaps to justify the use of black magic by witches. Little is discussed about the justification required for such work, and it is more likely that these articles were produced by either supposedly good Christians or employed cunning folk rather than witches.

What these scenes appear to promote is that modern witchcraft (like its older ancestor) was not above working this kind of magic when it was called for. That witches could do good as well as harm if they so desired. This is completely contrary to what Gerald B. Gardner publically stated as well as what he told his initiates. It would seem that Alex was helping to promote the idea that witchcraft had no moral foundation, and that the practice of supposedly “white” magic went hand and hand with the practice of “black” magic. Witches were therefore to be perceived as individuals who determined their own fate, and could, if provoked, do harm to others as part of their craft. You can see that this particular perspective is quite different than what is popularly spoken of today as the tenets of the religion of Wicca. In Alex’s version of witchcraft, there was no Wiccan Rede, and this is likely to be more an accurate portrayal of real witchcraft than what passes for a white-washed rendition of the Craft today.

This leads the viewer to the next scene, which is where Alex and his coven supposedly perform a Black Mass. We see a darkened indoor temple with a witchcraft circle in the center, but there is an altar set before a large forward leaning crucifix on the far end. Alex Sanders is fully clothed in what appears to be opulent church vestments. He is assisted by an acolyte properly dressed in choir robes and a surplice. Alex goes through the movements of performing a mass, invoking the Christ on the cross as Lucifer, and presenting incense, lustral water and the entwined flowers of the lily and the rose. Then he is assisted in removing the outer covering of his vestments, leaving him dressed in his under-robe, called an alb.

Maxine is sitting off to one side of the temple, scantily clad, but then she is brought before Alex, who helps her to sit on the altar, giving her salutatious kisses and helping her to disrobe, while she reclines fully upon the altar. A “scarlet” woman brings a chalice of wine and a host, and the consecration is performed upon the naked body of the High Priestess as Diana, representing the consort of the Dying God, Lucifer. The chalice of wine is placed between her legs, and the host is blessed and kissed by both the Priest and Priestess. Then Alex, as the celebrant, takes his athame and pierces the host, and then he dips it into chalice of wine. He then takes the host, still pierced by the athame, and tosses both into the center of the witches circle, to be followed by the entwined lily and rose. He then assisted Maxine to rise and leave the altar, taking her in hand to the witches circle where they both sit. They are joined in the circle by the scarlet woman, now completely nude, who brings the chalice of consecrated wine. The two women help to divest Alex of his alb and then they share in the wine and host. We are told they are then to perform the Great Rite as a threesome, but of course, the scene ends before that act can be consummated.

Mixing the rites of the Mass with the works of magic and witchcraft is not a new theme in today’s world, and it is interesting that Alex experimented with this kind of magick. While I would not necessarily call it a Black Mass because the sacraments or tools aren’t actually desecrated, such a supposed parody of a holy rite would by itself be offensive to many. Witches today might wonder at why such a ritual was performed in the first place, and then, captured on film. Some might consider that it was done to merely to scandalize the public, and that it wasn’t an actual exploratory working.

Still, this rite was performed more than once by Alex, and there are even some colored photos of him dressed with these very same robes. Was there something of key importance that made Alex overlay his witchcraft practices upon a Christian ritual? Did he make this concoction of creeds part of his particular witchcraft tradition? I can’t answer these questions, but I can state that such mixed workings were not uncommon in the early Alexandrian tradition. I can also say that I myself not only engaged in this kind of magick, but that I even managed to receive both an ordination and a consecration in the Old Catholic church. What I would do differently than the depiction of this rite would be to omit the large Crucifix before the altar. I would also omit tossing the host and athame into the circle, and of course, I would avoid the mental overlay of witchcraft upon the Christian symbols and practices. To Alex, there was no difference between Christianity and its holy symbols, and the symbology of Witchcraft as he understood it. However, I and many other Witches and Pagans do make a distinction between our faith, and the faith of other creeds. I respect other religions, so I would ensure that what I did was quite distinct from what others might do using an analogous liturgy.

Alex was doing something that he thought was important and relevant in his time, but it is also relevant in our present time. This is because I, too, make use of reworked and rewritten pagan versions of the Mass liturgy that are specifically performed for magical uses and ritual empowerment. I would suspect that Alex was experimenting with the same kind of ritual working, done for a similar purpose. When I did my experimenting many years ago, there was already a precedent for this kind of work, but it is likely that Alex was something of a pioneer when he did it. There are a number of things that I can’t talk about in regards to this kind of working, but I have determined for myself that it is a valid use and employment of the Mass rite.

The final scene in this documentary concerns itself with the affects of both sound and light on the mind. There are implications that altered states of consciousness, as produced by modern devices and methods, were something that modern witches made use of as a part of their regimen of tools and techniques. In the movie we see a science lab with various tools that produce unusual optical effects, such as the whirling spiral or the strobe light. Perhaps a bit too much time is spent viewing this whirling spiral (I found myself looking away from it), as if to put the viewer into some kind of trance state. Then we see another glimpse of the witch coven putting out the fire in the outdoor grove with their feet, and seemingly not being burned by this act. This seems to indicate that witches perform their rites in some kind of trance state that allows them to deal with the elements and not be hurt by them.

Then the scene shifts again, and we are once more in the indoor Witch temple, and this time the object of the working is to place a person in a deep trance so that he might peer into the future, a form of active divination called skrying. In a dimly lit temple, a whirling spiral image is projected on one wall. We are told that this operation will be employing a combination of old and new techniques, thereby incorporating ancient witchcraft with modern technology to accomplish the desired end. I would also consider that such a mixture of old and new techniques is a prominent feature of the post modern age. Such a mixed regimen represents the creative foundation of what a Pagan Magus would incorporate in the modern world.

The skrying subject, in this case a robed male witch who is sitting in a cloth circle, is subjected to the hypnotic powers of the whirling spiral and an intermittent strobe light. He is assisted to disrobe, his arms and ankles bound with cords, and then he kneels in front of a simple altar. We see that lying before this altar is an elaborately painted octagram floor piece, and upon it, a pulsating strobe light. The skryer is lightly scourged with a whip while kneeling, and then the chief celebrant, dressed in a robe and with the head of a goat, assists the skryer by completely wrapping him up in the cloth circle. He then unwraps him after a brief period. The skryer is then helped to move forward to the altar, where he makes an obeisance to the God Lucifer. He is given a drink from the chalice, and then helped to stare deeply into the strobe light as all of the candle lights are extinguished. Only the strobe light is intermittently pulsating its bright beam of light and all else is completely dark. 

Then suddenly a sun mirror is revealed, with a brilliant light reflecting off of its surface, dazzling ones eyes with its light. At that moment in the film, the scene melts into the image of the dawning sun appearing through clouds and overlooking the sea. It is the same coastal area shown in previous scenes, with a naked man standing on a rock before the surging tide. We are told by the narrator that the path of Witchcraft is completely beyond all life and death, as if the vision instilled by the skryer has been revealed to be this pristine image of the dawning light, greeted by the naked worshiper.

While this final rite was likely staged, since not enough time was taken at each step to ensure that the trance effects were wholly realized, it did demonstrate the technique used to produce a profound trance state where a clairvoyant vision might be received. The process of trance induction used a combination of light and music to aid the skryer in acquiring that state, and so too, did the disrobing, binding, scourging, cloaking and uncloaking. One might assume that there was more in the chalice than wine, but that remained unstated. A true skrying effort would have taken at least an hour or two to complete, but as this was a short documentary, and the last scene, it was merely a demonstration of what might have actually been done. The fake looking goat head mask that Alex was wearing seems almost ludicrous today, but perhaps it represented that he was operating under a godhead assumption, adding the power of the Deity to the overall working.

This entire documentary showed that the Witchcraft practiced in 1969 was highly experimental and creatively motivated. Modern and traditional methods were seamlessly incorporated to produce the most effective results. Lore and liturgy were appropriated from other traditions, but the essence of what was done was still within the pure spirit of the original creed of modern pagan witchcraft. Since the lore of this tradition was sparse and likely from questionable sources, replacement lore was developed and used to fill out that tradition so that it had a more complete and comprehensive praxis. This is not any different than what others later did with their original but sparse traditions, particularly those that evolved into the many forms of modern Paganism and Witchcraft today. Gaps in the lore and supposedly lost methodologies required the incorporation of new perspectives, regardless of their source.

The final result was a wholly new system and praxis, incorporating both traditional and new elements. While this documentary is quite dated and obviously promoting myths and self-serving beliefs instead of historically verified facts, the resultant creativity was neither compromised nor made spurious by this association. By viewing the film, we get to see Alex engaging in a very creative approach to his beliefs and practices. He was not yet an Alexandrian witch, but he had already broken away from those who represented the witchcraft orthodoxy of the time. Alex Sanders was in the process of creating a new tradition and praxis by merely allowing his creative imagination to have the opportunity to freely associate ideas, to experiment and explore new ground.

Perhaps the most interesting thing about this obscure documentary is that it shows us all how to be a Pagan Magus, by showing the experiments and exploits of one of the better known pagan magi of our time. Alex Sanders passed away in 1988, but he left behind him a considerable legacy, even though he never wrote or published any of his thoughts, beliefs or practices. Instead, he used the media to document what he was doing, and he left it to his followers to write his biography and to present to us his legacy. While it might be true that Alex didn’t have the gift of being a writer, he did manage to leave behind, through the writings of others, his many different perspectives and beliefs. There is also an entire tradition of witchcraft called the Alexandrian, which Alex left behind, although it wasn’t either his purpose or desire to create a new tradition. Alex and Maxine called themselves witches with no other descriptive adjective, and it was only their later followers who distinguished themselves as Alexandrians, in honor of both Alex and Maxine. 

-

We can see echos of their work throughout the decades following the time of this film, and in fact, in the 1984 documentary, “The Occult Experience” produced by Nevill Drury, we can see the same initiation of the four elements being enacted in the segment on Janet and Stewart Farrar. An older Alex Sanders performed a godhead assumption in that film, briefly becoming the embodiment of an Aztec Fire God. He also accidently started his breech clout on fire with a candle torch that he was brandishing, but he deftly put it out with his other hand, all without missing a beat. 

Alex was still experimenting with his creed and extending his knowledge into domains that most witches would never have even dreamed of entering, even to the very last years of his life. It’s for this reason that I venerate his memory and consider Alex Sanders as a true Pagan Magus. I have been conducting my practice of witchcraft and ritual magic in the same creative and mutable manner that he did years ago, whether I realized it or not. Perhaps, I am seeking one day to be known as a Pagan Magus, just as he was so many years ago.

Frater Barrabbas 

Thursday, January 27, 2011

Definitions of Religion - Legitimacy vs. Authenticity



My previous article brought up some interesting side issues that caught me quite by surprise in regards to the question of Strega lineages, something which I had to beg forbearance from my readers, since I know very little about that particular topic. Still, I often find these discussions and arguments fairly useless, since they often confuse and conflate two very different processes that are active in religion, and that is the difference between legitimacy and authenticity. While these issues have less of an impact in larger community religions, such as Christianity, they are quite hotly contested in the much smaller religious communities of witchcraft and paganism.

First of all, lets look at the definition of these two terms, starting with the dictionary definitions and then look at them in regards to sociological and psychological definitions. We also need to keep in mind that there are two very dissimilar viewpoints characterizing religion, that of exoteric or public religion and that of esoteric or occultic religion. Depending on a person’s or group’s perspective, the terms of legitimacy or authenticity can have a far greater weight and importance.

If we look at the dictionary definition for the word “legitimate,” we will find amongst the expected definitions the term “lawful” and “conforming to accepted rules, standards, etc.” Since we are not talking about a legitimate birth, we won’t go into the definitions that are concerned with how one was born, although sometimes the terms associated with legitimate and illegitimate in regards to birth do get conflated when discussing religious organizations. This is why some groups may be referred to as legitimate or illegitimate, where the proper term would be sanctioned or unsanctioned in regards to rules and protocols - a concern specific to spiritual and religious legitimacy. 

The dictionary definition of the word “authentic” gives the associated terms “genuine” and  “real,” which I believe are important for our discussion. Interestingly, the word “authenticate” has the associated phrases “to make valid, to verify, to prove to be genuine.” It would seem that authentic would represent a religious system where genuine and real experiences are held in high esteem as opposed to lawful decorum or conforming to doctrines, practices or rules. So it would seem that the word authentic is concerned with inner experiences and legitimacy is concerned with outer practices and established rules.

These two terms, when used to define a religious group or organization reveal the fact that they refer to different and opposed dimensions. Legitimacy defines a horizontal dimension that represents social integration, cohesion, group identity and order (rules, doctrine, practices). Authenticity defines a vertical dimension that is more focused on the individual and upon personal transformation and transcendence. Just this simple differentiation of terms reveals two very starkly different approaches to religion. One is exoteric, socially integrative and is concerned with communication and accessibility, and the other is esoteric, insular, and is concerned with mysteries, paradoxes and methods of inducing ecstasy. The former is engaged with translation, the later, with transformation. As you can see, these two dynamics in religion have contrary goals and directions, and confusing them can make communication between adherents of the same faith nearly impossible.   


To further clarify this discussion, I want to present a distillation of some of Ken Wilber’s perspectives and ideas on this issue. It was while I was reading and studying some of his ideas about religion that I had an experience that changed the way I look at religion in general, and more specifically, people’s engagement in their own chosen religion. After reading and digesting what Ken Wilber has wrote on this topic, it was almost as if a light turned on in my mind. I finally realized how easy it was for individuals and groups in witchcraft and paganism to get into passionate disputes with each other, forcing schisms and breaking up groups and spiritual families. I discovered that it often came down to whether one chose to follow the path of religious legitimacy or religious authenticity. The recent schism in the Faery/Feri tradition would seem to represent this particular distinction and how it can push individuals to follow one path or the other. They are not mutually exclusive, and in fact many have found a religious path that incorporates a certain degree of both, but they do represent diametrically opposing directions, and one can’t fully and wholly engage in one without diminishing or nullifying the other.

Let me continue with my discussion about my studies and what I discovered. Ken Wilber has written a book entitled “A Sociable God” (Shambhala Publications, 2005) to help define religion and religious phenomena using the latest theories in both the social sciences, as well his own theories regarding Integral Psychology. I have found this work to be extremely important and ground breaking, since it reduces down to a simple set of definitions what is a very complex multi-disciplined set of theories which contradict each other and are hotly debated between scholars of the same or different disciplines. Ken Wilber has offered this simplified and systematic approach, thus unifying the different perspectives and eliminating contentious points of view. I might also add that these opposing views have done more to confuse the various issues about the nature of religion than clarify them.

The greatest problem in defining religion is that it is many things to many people. There is, as yet, no single uniform perspective embodying all religious viewpoints, or at least none that would make any sense. This is precisely the point that Mr. Wilber made in his work. I will present Wilber’s ideas distilled from his book in the paragraphs below for the sake of efficiency and brevity. I also wish to present this information in manner that cuts to the core of the issues surrounding religion, assisting us to succinctly understand the spiritual and religious beliefs involving witchcraft, paganism and magick.

In his book (see chapter 5, pages 98 -102), Ken Wilber presents seven distinct perspectives based on a general  definition of religion, using a combination of the various social and psychological theories. He identifies seven basic areas, and includes two more that help to determine the depth and breadth of any one single creed (vertical and horizontal dimensions). We will cover each of these in the order that Wilber presented them in his book. Keep in mind that some previous theorists have written whole books on just one of these seven perspectives.

1. Religion is a non-rational engagement. By labeling it non-rational, religion is therefore defined as belonging to or originating out of a dimension that is “other” to reason and rationality. This would indicate that the nature of Spirit, of which religion is principally concerned about, is something that can’t be either quantified or even qualified, thus making it wholly transcendental and paradoxical.

2. Religion is an extremely meaningful or integrative engagement. This definition perceives religion as being an entirely social phenomenon that brings people together, teaching them to resolve their differences and live peacefully for the common good of all. Therefore, religion is concerned with making collective meaning and searching for collective truths that further the integrity and stability of the communal organization.

3. Religion is an immortality project, which is created to deal with the insecurities associated with the ephemeral quality of human life. This theory defines religion as a powerful social belief system that bolsters the confidence of the individual member, giving one a sense of being an elite participant in the collective destiny of the group. This has the effect of assisting individuals to cope with catastrophic loss and death (as well as the potential for such) by causing them to focus instead on the guarantee of a spiritual afterlife.

4. Religion is a mechanism for evolutionary growth through conscious transformation and spiritual evolution, so that by applying oneself to its discipline, one can fully apprehend the spiritual dimension of the self. As Wilber so adroitly put it: “[E]volution and history is a process of increasing self-realization, or the overcoming of alienation via the return of spirit to spirit as spirit.” This whole process represents the drive for transcendent self-realization and personal transformation.

5. Religion represents a social phenomenon of collective psychotic fixations and is therefore, inherently regressive, pre-personal and pre-rational. Wilber says that this perspective has a negative opinion about religion: “[R]eligion is childish illusion, magic, myth.” This perspective represents the typical attitude of empirical science and academia towards religion in general, and is a major part of the creeds of social secularism and atheism. Sigmund Freud held this opinion about religion, and so did Karl Marx and many others.

6. Religion is an exoteric social institution, and its mysteries and paradoxes are understood through the periodic and continual practice of liturgy and the study of sacred scriptures, shared by all members of a specific doctrine or creed. Religion is a public organization where everything is determined and explained in great detail, and nothing is left to chance or self-determination. Exoteric religion consists of the basic and fundamental principles of any religious organization. As Wilber has said in his book: It is a “form of belief system used to invoke or support faith,..preparatory to [an] esoteric experience and adaption..”

7. Religion is esoteric and occultic, and its mysteries and paradoxes are obscured and buried deep within the core belief system that everyone else takes for granted. These mysteries are typically not realized by the general adherent, but requires a deeper and inner exposure to that spiritual system, often acquired through the agency of a teacher and an individualized spiritual practice. The goal of esoteric religion is the obtainment of mystical experiences and a direct realization of spirit in all manifestation.

After having written down these seven different perspectives on the nature of religion, Wilber then examines the horizontal and vertical dimensions of the scope of religion, which brings us to the polarization of the two terms, legitimacy and authenticity. Notice the contrast between translation and transformation, which particularly characterize the breadth and depth of a particular religious practice.

8. Religion is only legitimate when it validates the particular “translation” or perspective established by a given doctrine or creed, usually providing its members positive reinforcements (“good mana”), and helping them to avoid social taboos (“bad mana”). This confers upon individuals a powerful emotional and social sense of being a member of a spiritual community, thereby providing personal meaningfulness, group destiny, and eschatological symbols of immortality.

Legitimacy in religion represents a horizontal dimension to qualifying a religion, and it incorporates the above definitions 2, 3 and 6. Legitimacy is concerned with the smoothness of translation (that it is readily understandable and rational) and the integrity of its social values.

9. Religion is authentic when it validates the particular “transformation” or deeper inner experience of a spiritual system. An authentic religion cuts through doctrine and dogma, giving its adherents the tools and methodologies to achieve a direct experience with the core of that religious system, and is less concerned with the outer trappings and the exegesis of liturgy and sacred scriptures.

Authenticity in religion represents a vertical dimension to qualifying a religion, and it incorporates the definitions 1, 4 and 7. Authenticity is concerned with the degree of personal transformative power and intensity associated with religious experiences, and the internal realization of truths that are paradoxical and irrational. Authenticity challenges individual spiritual seekers, forcing them to move beyond belief and faith, so as to directly experience the spiritual dimension.

So you can see from the above discussion that legitimacy and authenticity are two very different dimensions that will produce, when used exclusively, two very different religious organizations. However, most religions in the world are actually a hybrid of both of these dimensions, although as I have said, a religious group will tend to emphasize one over the other. This is also true when examining the different groups and organizations of witchcraft and paganism. Some of these groups emphasize social integration and communication, others emphasize personal transformation and occultic practices. You can see that when individuals of a greater organization who don’t agree on which emphasis should be used attempt to communicate with each other, they will not only fail to agree, but that they will not usually be able to understand the other person’s perspective. Arguments that involve legitimacy pitted against authenticity will almost always fail unless someone has the enlightened perspective that both approaches are correct, and that there is no one true way.

This also leads us to consider the nature of legitimacy within religious organizations. It would seem that it is a kind of social consensus, an agreement between members of the group. This agreement becomes part of the accepted doctrine, and therefore, is never questioned. For instance, Catholics believe that the Pope’s authority, vested in him from God, is legitimate because he represents an unbroken line of reverent individuals going all the way back to the apostle Peter. The Pope is, therefore, a representative of the apostle Peter, and all of the vested belief in Jesus Christ, his apostles and the doctrines and liturgy of the Church has been mystically translated into his very person. Does the Pope really represent an unbroken line going back to the apostle Peter? Historians would probably disagree with that claim, since for a period of time there were two opposing Popes. There is, additionally, the question of the personal integrity of some Popes in history, which might negate the idea of continuity. Also, the church hierarchy has always been the arbiter of the selection and crowning of the Pope; it is not something intrinsic in the individual, but an important role. Yet it is the consensus amongst faithful Catholics, from the lay person all the way up to the Curia of Cardinals, that the Pope represents an unbroken line, whether or not historians are willing to agree, or even that others outside of the faith would agree to its significance.

We can examine this logic and also apply it to some specific considerations in the British Tradition of Witchcraft (BTW) as it is perceived and practiced in the U.S. I am an Alexandrian witch, properly trained and initiated through all three degrees. I possess my Book of Shadows as it was given to me to be copied by my teachers, and I have papers, rituals and other lore that was passed down to me by my teachers. I have also initiated a score of women over the three decades of my practice. So one could say that I am unquestionably a legitimate witch of the BTW. Right? Not necessarily. Because there is some dispute as to whether Alex Sanders was properly initiated through all three degrees in the Gardnerian tradition, and given the sanction to promote his own initiatory line, some Gardnerians believe that all Alexandrians are not legitimate members of the BTW. Some have even said that Alexandrians aren’t even witches! (Of course, we won’t even get into a discussion of whether or not my teachers, who broke their oaths and became fundamentalist preachers, would be considered posthumously illegitimate, and therefore, negate my claim to legitimacy.)

I have personally experienced Gardnerians who were unwilling to allow me to circle with them or to even talk with me about any of their secrets because I am not, in their definition, a properly initiated Gardnerian witch. I am treated as an outsider, or perhaps a better term, as some kind of “spiritual bastard.” These same Gardnerians will admit that I am kind of a witch and a pagan, but not a legitimate member of their lineage. I have been shunned and treated as if I were the love child of some base relative. Yet my Book of Shadows and my core teachings are nearly identical to the same material used by Gardnerians. There are minor differences between the different initiatory lines of the BTW, and the unique lore of my line is no different in that respect than any other. Still, I am treated by some as an outsider.

Does this treatment bother me? Not in the least! I am not affected by this condescending behavior because I don’t need the consensus of the greater witchcraft community to validate the fact that I am indeed witch and a ritual magician. However, it does bother some witches, and I have known Alexandrians who have gotten themselves a Garderian pedigree in order to be more legitimate in the eyes of the greater witchcraft community. Why does this circumstance bother some and not others? The reason is the distinction in the emphasis between legitimacy and authenticity. For me, the most important perspective is to be authentically a witch. It doesn’t matter to me what the overall social consensus of the witchcraft community thinks is right or proper. What is important to me is that the magick I practice and the liturgical rites that I perform are effective and fulfilling for me as a spiritual person. Also, the most important goal that I am seeking is to unify myself with the One - to be enlightened and illuminated through transcendental transformation. I do work with my community as a teacher, spiritual elder and leader, but the focus of my practice is on the individual rather than the group. One could easily say that my emphasis is almost wholly towards being authentic rather than legitimate, and ritual magick probably has had a powerful effect in pushing me in that direction.

When I read or hear individuals arguing about their initiatory legitimacy or its lack, I understand and know why such a controversy is occurring. It is, in fact, a dispute over social consensus and membership credentials. Is it a valid discussion or argument? That depends on one's overall perspective, but from the standpoint of the tradition of witchcraft, authenticity must outweigh legitimacy. There are some very important reasons why this is so.

An individual’s claim to be a witch should never rest exclusively on the integrity of their supposed initiatory lineage. My tattered and questionable lineage is a case in point. I have also known a few individuals who had impeccable initiatory lineages, but who were also either completely incompetent or totally corrupt. I have also known individuals who had no exoteric initiation in any kind of reputable organization, but who were probably some of the most powerful witches I have ever encountered. Having a pedigree is no guarantee that one is a competent and capable witch, in fact sometimes it would even seem to guarantee a certain degree of fallibility and hubris. As I have stated previously, initiation is not the same thing as transcendental transformation, but for someone who seeks to emphasize authenticity over legitimacy, it becomes critically important that both occur simultaneously.

In my humble opinion, a witch should be first and foremost measured by his or her ability to function as a witch. A proper initiation and the reception of the lore of a particular line may confer legitimacy, but can’t guarantee that one is even truly a witch. What this means is that a witch is a witch because they practice witchcraft and worship the old gods. Does this negate traditions, lineages and families of witchcraft? No, it doesn’t negate them, but it also doesn’t make them a requirement for being a witch, either.

When someone comes to me and says that they are a witch, then I have the right to test them in a magick circle. If they pass that test, then I must respect that they are indeed a witch. Do I break my oaths and share the lore that was handed down to me by my teachers? Of course not! But I will also not exclude them from circling or practicing magick with me. This also means that all of the lore that I know and possess that is not covered by my initiatory oath is available for sharing with that person. Not only that, but I will believe them if they tell me that they are a witch, and I will consider them a sister or a brother - perhaps of a different line than my own, but still kindred seekers on the path of magick and mystery. Eventually, perhaps the distinction of lineages, traditions and families will melt away in the practice of witchcraft, thus we will all be of one overall greater tradition, and we will also be individual seekers after the same goals. I look forward to that time, where authenticity will rule and legitimacy will be considered a quaint affectation.

Frater Barrabbas

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Happy Samhain 2010 - A New Year



I wanted to take a moment and wish everyone a very happy and safe Samhain/Hallows for this year. For some, this represents the boundary of a new year, where the old year has died and the new begins to emerge. It can be a time of reflection, insight, remembrance of those that passed - both recently and further away in time. It is a time of commemorating those deceased that we admired, emulated to some degree, or even accepted as mentors. Having a spiritual or occult mentor is truly an important feature in the life of an occultist, witch or ritual magician. However, that mentor doesn’t always have to be alive in order for one to find their work inspirational and deeply meaningful.

Dead mentors are probably almost as important as the living ones, since they offer us a legacy without any real strings attached. For me, three individuals have acted like unwitting mentors to me over the course of my career as a witch, occultist and magician. These three individuals are, in order of importance, Alex Sanders, Aleister Crowley and Samuel Liddell MacGregor Mathers. There are other authors and teachers who have had an impact on me (and who are no longer living), but these three have had the greatest impact on me in regards to my studies and practices.

Alex Sanders was probably the most flamboyant witch and ceremonial magician in the mid to late 20th century since Old Gerald himself. Alex freely mixed practical Gardnerian witchcraft with the Golden Dawn system of magick along with parts of the Solomonic grimoire tradition. In many ways, Alex pointed the way for me to proceed in my own spiritual and magickal travels. Even though I was initiated into the Alexandrian tradition on Candlemas, 1976, I never got the chance to meet Alex or Maxine Sanders while they lived together in London in the 70's. I had an acquaintance who met them and even briefly circled with them as a guest, but I never got the opportunity to travel to England to meet them myself. (Some who knew him well have told me that this was probably a good thing, since Alex was reputed to be a very “naughty” boy.)

Alex left behind very few writings, and from what I was able to determine from his written lectures and what others who knew him said about his studies, he was much more of a classical occultist and trained medium than I am, since he readily mixed eastern philosophies, Theosophy and spiritualism with his practical workings. However, Alex was quite an experimenter, and was attempting to fuse a number of different fragmentary systems of occultism together, to create his own version of a pagan system of the Golden Dawn. He lionized the use of the Rose Ankh, which he saw as a replacement or addition to the Rose Cross. Still, the many pictures of him and Maxine, and the books by Stewart Farrar, particularly the first book, “What Witches Do,” and the more nonsensical biography “King of the Witches” completely captured my imagination at a very young age. I can say that my personal and public systems of ritual magick owe a great debt to Alex Sanders – so to that end, I am thankful that he lived and made such a name for himself. It inspired many others to pursue their own path of witchcraft and ceremonial magick, especially me.

The next individual is Aleister Crowley, whose writings and books are an important part of my personal occult library. I have studied “Uncle Al,” as I like to call him, quite rigorously, and have found many of his essays, books and rituals to be highly informative. What I am not crazy about is how Uncle Al lived his life and dealt with people. I have also found some of his writings to be purposely misleading and perhaps even a bit harmful if taken literally. I, for one, would not see any purpose to cutting my arm with a razor blade every time I happened to utter the first person pronoun – this would certainly not, in my opinion, lead one to adopt a humble and ego-less state of mind. I also do not consider myself a Thelemite, nor do I see the “Book of the Law” as holy writ. You won’t find me parroting out of context tracts from that work. I do consider the Book of the Law to be an inspired work, just as the book “Vision and the Voice.” But inspired works are to be analyzed, not enshrined as items of worship.

Since I am not a person of the book, as it were, then I wouldn’t accept any writings as either holy or inviolable. Still, I consider Aleister Crowley to be the father of modern paganism and ritual magick. He was the first who proposed making the adoption of a godhead the principal practice in the art of magick, as he often would fully assume the godhead of Horus when he worked it. Witches and modern pagans have taken this practice to an even greater extreme than Crowley would have allowed, which has both points for and against it.

I was first introduced to Crowley’s writings when I was a teenager, which was a time when a lot of his books and writings were being reintroduced to the western world. After all these years, I still find myself going back and reading over his writings. Whether I agree with his personal lifestyle or fail to believe that he was some kind of occult messiah, I still find a great deal of value in his writings, therefore, I owe him a debt of gratitude.

A few friends of mine, some of whom are Thelemites, have agreed that if we could have actually met Crowley in some manner, we wouldn’t have liked him. Crowley was arrogant, cruel to his friends, allies and followers, abusive to his lovers, and an all around nasty fellow. He grew up wealthy and privileged, but died a poor man with a terrible Heroin addiction. While his personal life is not one to recommend to anyone, his writings stand out for all time. For the sake of his writings, I am grateful for his contribution to the practice of ritual and ceremonial magick.

The final individual that I feel an affinity and respect for is Samuel Liddell MacGregor Mathers, another giant in the annals of western occultism and ceremonial magick. Mathers was responsible for the formulation and establishment of the Golden Dawn organization. It was Mathers who brought the practice of magick from where it had been left in the 17th century into the late 19th century.

Mathers was an excellent scholar and researcher in his own right, and his unwitting legacy stands the test of time. I say unwitting, because Mathers would not have agreed with the Golden Dawn materials being published, and he unsuccessfully attempted to stop Crowley from publishing that lore in the Equinox. After that incident, the flood gate was opened, and there was nothing that Mathers could do to stem the tide. He passed away in the post WWI influenza epidemic that ravaged Paris and he didn’t live to see the fruit of that unwarranted publication. A few other of Mathers’ personal occult manuscripts were published by Crowley, and these, along with the Golden Dawn corpus and the few of Mathers’ legitimate publications represent a massive collection of transitional documents, showing how the occult lore of the earlier modern era was evolved into a system that is both elegant and workable today. Mathers’ legacy to the modern practice of ritual and ceremonial magick is virtually priceless, since the Golden Dawn has spawned a multitude of magickal and pagan systems throughout the western world.

I have often given Mathers a great deal of credit for starting the modern occult revolution of the 20th century, particularly in regards to the practice of magick and western based occultism. Little is actually known about Mathers and his life, and the various pundits and biographers who have written about him have not been very kind to his memory, beginning with Crowley himself. I would suspect that Mathers was a completely honorable man who steadfastly subscribed to the proper chain of transmission and secrecy inherent in the occult orders and organizations of the 18th and 19th centuries. That many no longer hold these values and beliefs as sacrosanct does not in any way diminish Mathers, his accomplishments and his steadfast belief in the Order that he had helped to found. Whether one believes that Mathers had contact with the secret chiefs or not, no one can dispute the legacy that he gave to all of us today who practice ceremonial or ritual magick with an initiatory basis. I suspect that if he were able to witness all that has happened to his lore over the last century, I think that he would have seen it as a positive manifestation of this genius rather than an abhorrent aberration to be condemned. He would not have agreed with the manner of the transmission of this lore, but perhaps would have consigned himself that its revelation did indeed help start a powerful cultural and spiritual movement. That effect may have been the over arching purpose as to why the revelation had occurred in the first place. 

So, these three luminaries are ultimately but not directly responsible for the fruit of my studies and the system of magick that I have forged. During this time of honoring the dead, I shall light a candle and say a Mass for all three of them. They have helped to make my practices and beliefs truly realized, and for this fact, I am deeply grateful.

Frater Barrabbas